News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Human Rights Watch Sues DEA Over Bulk Collection of Ameri... by evgen on Wednesday April 08, 2015 @08:53AM (#9340373)
It is also used to prevent random serial litigants from clogging up the court system with BS cases. Requiring the plaintiff to show that they have actually suffered harm is not a difficult bar to cross in most cases and the benefits this requirement brings to the legal system as a whole outweigh its inconvenience in cases like this.
Re:Human Rights Watch Sues DEA Over Bulk Collection of Ameri... by higherpurpose on Wednesday April 08, 2015 @10:28AM (#9340973)
I know, but I also know judges often rule based on "common sense" and "intent" of harm, regardless of the letter of the law.

Surely the fact that documents say that millions of people have been spied upon with such a program means that the judge should allow a case by an organization like EFF or HRW go through, even if the employees of that organization weren't personally affected by it? There should be a "for public interest" clause somewhere, or at least as an unwritten rule.

Re:Human Rights Watch Sues DEA Over Bulk Collection of Ameri... by harryh on Wednesday April 08, 2015 @11:30AM (#9341386)
How do you decide what organizations get that special privilege?
Re:Human Rights Watch Sues DEA Over Bulk Collection of Ameri... by jsnathan on Wednesday April 08, 2015 @09:08AM (#9340462)
Not to say that this is not a useful standard, but I do think we are beyond "inconvenience" here.

Following the current trajectory, surveillance is only going to grow as technology makes it easier and easier to gather more and more information without being noticed.

Re:Human Rights Watch Sues DEA Over Bulk Collection of Ameri... by happyscrappy on Wednesday April 08, 2015 @12:32PM (#9341945)
For all the handwringing about call records I can't help but think that the NSA has quite a few technologies that would make peoples heads spin. God knows what they have in skunk works.